ALAN SIMPSON (COMLINKS) presented a Paper re: the Y2k Post Mortems,

Tuesday.at: Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington D.C. on Tues. February 1, 2000.

http://www.comlinks.com/mag/psimh.htm

" Y2K - Private Sector Intelligence & Media Hype"

by Alan Simpson

President, Communication Links, Inc.

Today, knowledge management, and business intelligence show companies what color tube of toothpaste, a 35 year old white male, with a BA, driving a Honda Accord, prefers to buy in Aisle 7 of a supermarket in Pittsburgh. You would expect therefore the same companies to have no problem with the simple question, we asked back in 1996 and 1997, "Will your Computers work on 1st January 2000?"

We knew that Y2K was a serious problem unless solved in time, and when we had the first panel here at CSIS in June of 1998, we were amazed that many companies still couldnt answer that question. Most companies, and government departments, didnt know how much critical software they had, what it did, or why it was there. They had never given any thought either to would happen if the power failed, or to the vulnerability of their supply chain.

Those same corporations knew to the cent, the size and value of their physical inventories, yet through evolution, the enormous value of software, and essential IT systems just hadnt been counted. The effect on the enterprise of a wholesale failure of those same IT functions was lost on management. The attitude being that IT will always be there, moaning, complaining and delivering its projects late, and above budget! Keep in mind the success rate of IT projects is around 14%.

The first casualty of Y2K wasnt technical, it was the communication links between the enterprise, its suppliers, and their customers. Lawyers demanded "No Comment" be the response to any questions. That famine of information quickly turned to a feeding frenzy.

During 1999 every major corporation was slowly sinking under the sheer weight of compliance demands. Intelligence, even common sense was replaced by Lawyers.

Faced with that legal assault most corporations took their Counsels advice and said nothing! At the same time, on the same Counsels advice, they circulated volumes of demands for compliance information, they themselves were unwilling to give. The traditional PR and company spokesperson functions were deadly silent. Their well oiled machine for propagating information was reserved for good news, and news which had a measurable positive impact on the bottom line.

Both Governments and major corporations played the information game as they had for hundreds of years. "When we are ready we will let you know!"

Unfortunately the Internet had put an end to that era, and that means of managing information. The Internet has created an insatiable appetite for instant answers. If we do not instantly satisfy this thirst for answers, the surfing public tend to invent conspiracy theories as to why the information they seek is not there. They create a virtual void in cyberspace, which they perceive to contain the answer. Then they search the Information resources of the web to find a piece of information, or discussion thread that will fill that void. With Y2K we saw the first effects of the InfoVoid

"Information will be found on the Internet to fill the InfoVoid, regardless of source, or accuracy, if it conveniently, and plausibly fits the InfoVoid"

The case of Critical Infrastructure is a prime example. During 1998 industry criticized governments for not providing hard facts about the power grids, or telecoms. The information was out there if you knew where to look. Yet lack of immediately available public information was taken to mean disaster was looming, with martial law, and months without power a distinct probability. The authorities were silent.

Driving this doomsday scenario from 1998, was the hoopla surrounding embedded chips, or more correctly embedded systems, slated as the reason power, water and the phone system would collapse.

Talking to power engineers around the country, it became like a scene from a Monty Python sketch, with them asking "Pssst know where theres any embedded chips?" They could not find the billions of hidden embedded systems, with rogue date functions, because they did not exist! But yet the academics, and doomsayers had a field day in declaring the enormous scope of the problem. There was no intelligence available to give the correct figures. The figures were known to Pacific Rim semiconductor manufacturers, but they were keeping quiet, and watching the US squirm.

Instead of the hearings on embedded systems being conducted in the Senate, they should have been done on eBay! 20,billion, 40 billion, 60 billion, 80 billion, any advance on 80 billion!

This hysteria was driven by a whole army of Y2K Experts . Any Chicken Little who wanted to predict Apocalypse 2000 would get airtime. TV News loved them. I got this first hand. Producers called to ask if I would be prepared to come on TV or Radio shows and talk about the forthcoming collapse of the critical infrastructure, with months without water, power or telephone. When told that this would not happen, and 1/1/2000 would be a smooth transition, the conversation invariably ended with either a curt thank you, or a request for the names of anyone who would appear and satisfy the thirst for sensational information and entertainment. Talk radio has a lot to answer for, with Y2K.

The government, and power companies did not act quickly enough to fill the InfoVoid, and satisfy the nervous public. It was the Rabid Religious Right that seized upon this shortfall and created a whole industry of Y2K misinformation. The majority of misinformation can be directly traced back to a handful of websites, newsletters, and their academic supporters.

Incidentally the misinformation peaks coincided with the falling sales of newsletters, Y2K books, Y2K seminars, survival rations, and Gold. This panic was manufactured, not coincidental, and as I pointed out in papers on the GSA website, the "First World InfoWar".

We have learned a lot from this carefully crafted, and effective misinformation. We have been amazed at the reactions of the public, and the number of sane people who were driven to fear the worst. It is also amazing how many legitimate organizations took this hearsay and created reports, and predictions based on the hype and hoaxes.

Probably the first hoax we tracked was the Cadillac recall notice. This ricocheted around the Y2K mailing lists, chat rooms and Y2K sites, as proof that a serious embedded systems threat existed.

After several weeks the original surfaced, and was circulated as proof and evidence of a major disaster looming. It was immediately recognized as a hoax. A badly scanned logo from a brochure, no address, telephone number, or name of any officer. Close examination would have stopped this hoax earlier for it declared the recall, for computer failure, of all Cadillacs from 1972 till 1998. 1972??????

Learning from this crude hoax, the next one dispensed with incriminating pieces of paper. This was the Nuclear Power Plant Catastrophe. Several of these surfaced, all from a "reliable source" who dare not give his name, "because his job would be in jeopardy." This spoke of embedded systems buried deep in the nuclear pile which contained dates, whose existence the regulators were covering up. A Chernobyl meltdown would occur when the chips failed, causing the Boron rods to drop, and a subsequent reactor meltdown.

Problem, dropping Boron Rods slow down and eventually halts a nuclear reaction, and as any electronics engineer would have pointed out, nuclear reactor piles fry off-the-shelf embedded chips. They have to be kept well away from radiation.

Again learning from having too many facts in a media scare, the misinformation crowd created the Chemical Armageddon. Here the same "reliable sources" with no name, whose "job again would be in jeopardy" leaked to a friend, who told an acquaintance, who was overheard in a bar, mention that major refineries, and chemical works, were set to explode at midnight on December 31st, 1999, and cause massive chemical spills, and environmental disaster. They claimed that the government was paralyzed at the thought of panic, and FEMA was preparing plans to have millions of cardboard coffins ready for the holocaust. No reassuring from the major chemical companies could quell the enthusiasm of the "Headless Chickens" to spread the bad news. People still believed it.

By mid-summer 1999, the majority of the public were getting a little tired of Y2K, and so even more outlandish plots had to be created to sell doomsayer books, seminars, survival rations, and other "investments". The newsgroups and mailing lists had been completely taken over by survivalists, doomsayers and religious zealots convinced that TEOTWAWKI, The End of The World As We Know It would occur on the strike of midnight.

The misinformation campaign probably reached its zenith in July /August 1999, when the secret "Pentagon Y2K Report", from the Navy was unveiled. According to one version of the myth a Chief Petty Officer supposedly handed the report to a "Y2K Expert", in a Car Park. He immediately created a web site in Tonga, that secure bastion of sensitive information.

Tonga was chosen because the combined efforts of the CIA, NSA, and FBI were scouring the USA with Black Helicopters searching for this report and the report recipient feared for his life. ( Incidentally I believe the server for the Tonga .to websites is in Florida, which makes the rationale somewhat suspect.) This made the last hooray of Y2K Doomsayers suitable for a James Bond movie, should the situation arise.

This Secret Report, which was claimed to be easily identified as to source, could not be released, or even seen by mere mortals for many weeks, less they would be captured and assassinated by government hit squads.

Millions swallowed this, and believed this hoax, and of course ran out to buy the books and survival kits!! It was spread by the wire services, mailing lists, and doomsayer newsletters, and was picked up by newspapers around the world. John Koskinen even made statements about the hoax, saying it was "An outdated report, at least 8 weeks old." The official handling of the rebuttal was weak to say the least.

A well known TV program called me and asked if I was worried about Orlando, in light of the damming report from the Senior Naval Commander, at the Navy Base.

The fact that the Navy Base had been closed for several years had been missed. The report also quotes the population of Orlando as 165,000, which is about half the number in Magic Kingdom, EPCOT and Pleasure Island on New Years Eve. My suggestion was that they check the list with their local affiliates, which later confirmed that many of the bases in the report had been closed, some for a very long time.

Regardless of how we look back at these hoaxes, or misinformation, they were believed by millions, and thousands purchased generators, survival rations, and expected to spend 2000 without power or critical infrastructure. They fitted the InfoVoid, of worried cyberparents, and those least able to dig deeper for accurate information.

It wasnt just the public who were drawn into the hysteria. Presented with all this "evidence" crafted to fit the scenario, and with the suspicions of the public, and enough emotion and intrigue to make it entertaining, the mass media eagerly embraced the misinformation, and fulfilled their objectives, entertainment first, and news second. The worst predictors of doom and destruction were surprisingly enough the religious broadcasters, who appeared at times to be reveling at the thought of Armageddon.

TV Networks, in their defense, did call the CEOs and CIOs of industry, and government, and posed the same question I used to open this presentation. "Will the computers Work?"

The answer was "We dont know?"

Facing a need to fill the InfoVoid they gave airtime to the self styled "Y2K Experts" who predicted doomsday, except of course to those who bought their books, attended their seminars, or purchased their investments.

But that was not the only goal of many of the doomsayers. Behind this Chicken Little mantle there was a serious message.

Many openly preached the end of fractional banking, the collapse of the economy, and of Wall Street. Many openly advocated armed resistance, and thousands of handguns and rounds of ammunition were purchased specifically for Y2K. Not everyone prophesying the doomsayer side of Y2K were doing it for the sake of book sales!

In the end Y2K was fortunate, it ended on a bang, on a known date, with no more opportunities to create chaos, and with a spectacular firework display. The finite point that had been the dread of Y2K turned out to be its blessing. On January 2nd it was all over in the eyes of the public. They enjoyed the fireworks, enjoyed the entertainment, and were bracing themselves for the winter storms. The IT departments said "We have found and fixed most programs, and those bits we missed, we will fix when they become a problem." There was no way anyone could extend the misinformation campaign.

Throughout industry many CEOs are beginning to question the amount spent on Y2K. Many believe it was all a hoax, and many believe there should be inquiries into the doomsayer predictions. Already lawsuits are being filed against Consultants, claiming misleading hype. They forget the huge reengineering leap that Y2K has achieved, and the level of cooperation created between industry, local and central governments. Y2K was a serious problem, and through hard work has been fixed, for now. We still have to tell the majority of computers that it really isnt 1972, but that is a long way off.

What have we learned from Y2K:

1. Private Sector Intelligence is more than analyzing toothpaste sales on Aisle 7. A corporation must constantly examine the relationship it has with suppliers, and the support infrastructure, essential for business continuity. It must be aware of any threat, external and internal, to its ability to operate.

2. Corporations must have well developed contingency plans, and these contingency plans must cater to multiple failures at the same time. Just planning to use the same backup service as everyone else, is not a good practice.

3. Utilities, financial institutions, and major corporations need to critically examine their external information systems, and the procedures they adopt to give out bad news, as well as glowing promotional publicity releases. Customers are critical and should be kept in the information loop.

4. Trade Associations must be able to accurately asses the numbers, impact and scope of any computer threats or events on their industry. No more guessing at numbers.

5. Governments need to overhaul how they manage information, as well as improving economic and infrastructure intelligence. The Information Age is Real Time as regards information, and the old techniques of in-depth analysis of potential problems, highly classified, and compartmentalized, no longer work. Unless an immediate, informed response is available, the public will search to fill the InfoVoid, from the most plausible source, that is readily available. In times of serious crisis that could lead to significant damage to the government. Manipulated it could undermine a stable Information Age government. It is easier to do billions of dollars economic damage to a country, than it is to do millions of dollars of military damage.

And what about the threat from Hackers. The Hackers, unlike the FBI, had read Sun Tzu, The Art of War, and declined to attack the enemy camp, when he knew the exact time, and place of their attack, had all defenders on alert, all traffic reduced to a minimum, and anti-virus safeguards in place. Unfortunately this as resulted in a false sense of security and invincibility, in many System Administrators offices. There are still many unanswered questions concerning offshore remediation, and armies of unknown consultants combing through critical code.

Finally, beware of the InfoVoid! Governments and Corporations need to quickly provide the answers the public seeks and deny external organizations the opportunity. If allowed to multiply it is the first Weapon of Mass Destruction of the information Age!

(This keynote speech was presented at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington D.C. on 1st February, 2000)

Alan Simpson

International Communicator, Broadcaster and Award Winning Speaker, with presentations in over 60 countries.

A leading spokesman on communications, infrastructure threats, and private sector intelligence, testifying before the US Congress, briefings before US Senate, White House, and keynoting major conferences. Widely quoted, his papers are available on many web sites around the world. He appears regularly on CNN, and also on ABC, NBC, CBN, CSPAN, PBS, ITN, BBC, NZTV, Discovery and on radio and TV talk shows worldwide.

His ComLinks.com website has been viewed by over 4 million people from 140 countries.

President of Communication Links, Inc., and LeisureTime Network, Inc., and Director of CICIS, the Center for Information Communication and Intelligence Studies.

A global satellite pioneer, specializing in information and news networks. For the Reagan Administration, surveyed global media facilities, and 125 US Embassies and Consulates, developing USIA "Worldnet".

ComLinks.com ---- eMail: news@comlinks.com

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), February 02, 2000

Answers

so...........they will say anything to avoid truth. including talking about the truth in a demeaning way. who knows exactly what the truth is regarding y2k but i would venture to say it is somewhere between this article and this bulletin board.

-- tt (cuddluppy@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

This is a very interesting article. Those who disagree strongly will have turned off or started to hyper-scan down it somewhere around or slightly before the assassination of Jim Lord. Those who AGREE with it will turn off at about the words "Lawsuits have been filed against Consultants" and will read no further.

Both of these responses really had to be predictable. The unfortunate part of the crafting of this address/document is that the lessons learned are SUPERB.

It is truly unfortunate that the readers of the document, from either camp on Y2K will never get to read them as they will have self- selected to scan or simply turn the page before they get to them.

Joss

-- Joss Metadi (warhammer@pride.of.Mandeyne), February 02, 2000.

I have mixed feelings about the body of this report. The first paragraphs are reasonable, but the second half constitutes a very poor characterization of Y2K "doomers". At least, us yourdonites never talked about Cadillac call-backs, were almost never invited to mass media or talk shows, let alone what was happening elsewhere in the rest of the world, which contains 75% of the world code.

Unless of course the rest of the Y2K-world does not matter in today's globalized economy, which is still a one trillion dollar ($ 1,000,000,000,000) mystery yet to be solved.

The phrase referring to the fact that many computers were rolled back to 1972 and still need to be rolled forward to 2000 some time or other is rather interesting and food for thought.

Funny enough, the conclusions of this article are pretty valid, although the author has a strict US-centric view of Y2K and of the world economy (think Italy, Russia, Brazil, Ukraine, Japan, etc.)

Furthermore, let's just wait for the fat lady to sing.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.

so if i hear the author of the article correctly, all the hype about embeds in oil refineries was just that eh? hype.

in all my 50 yrs on this planet, i've never ONCE see oil rise $.50 - $.75 per gallon in less than a week. NEVER. i've never heard/read about as many refinery shutdowns, explosions, problems etc in the several months/wk preceding/following the rollover. NEVER.

what an AMAZING coincidence that all this should happen now.

excuse me while i wipe the tears off my face for laughing so hard. but am i missing something here?

-- lou (lanny1@ix.netcom.com), February 02, 2000.

--the real problem is quite simple. Because people in any organization have been required to comment on any potentialities by parrotting the "no comment" schtick, and because the track record of corporate and government orgs has a verifiable track record of lying or hiding the truth, those few times we might get told the truth get quite deservedly ignored or missed. It still isn't the "internets" fault, or individual writers or researchers. We're lied to and given the "no comment" or "it's normal" or "national security" on virtually everything, so I will continue to have to believe 180 degres from any official sources. Professional liars and obfuscators. Now what's to do with any government spokeman or private pr person who's telling the truth? Nothing, they have to keep on keeping on, same as we private researchers. everyone can continue to learn from their mistakes in researching, and the governments and corporations can decide to come clean every time, always tell the truth, and not just when it suits them. I still condemn the almost universal code of silence, and outright repression of "whistle blowers". Until such a time as government and large corporations can treat their workers fairly in all aspects, it's only prudent to think and prepare for the worse. Failure to do so means continually taking their "word" for any manner of things, and speaking only as a "Survivalist", I prepare no matter what, it doesn't matter y2k or not. Although I am "currently" wrong about my initial assessments of y2k, I never made it past #4 in my personal list of threats to prepare for, it was just prudent based on the risks and unknowing to focus on some more preps for the rollover and immediate time frame in some months thereafter, which I did, and for which I am grateful, as we just went through a 5 day grid outtage here, and the solar, propane and food we had let us cruise while others huddled cold dark and hungry. I like survivalism as a lifestyle, I hate being 100% dependent on big bro and big biz, makes no sense to me. I don't want to have to completely trust events outside of my control. I will USE outside sources, sure, why not, but I don't trust them all the way. sort of like a new dog who's hyper. You may want to pet it, he may want to be petted, but you never know when an accidental nip might happen. Same with the weather, politics, economics, on and on.

Human nature doesn't change, and neither do governments or complex industries. Things break, the weather can get weird, and of course governments can become completely fascist when they want to. all good reasons to prepare. If you hear on tv that your car has been recalled because of a possible problem with the brakes, do you ignore it because "mostly" all these other cars around you appear to have brakes? No, a prudent person will go get them fixed, even if the "appear" to be working now, because YOU NEVER KNOW. Listening to the technological pollys was EXTREMELY FOOLISH, because if they were completely wrong- which could have happened-then you'd be in a world of hurt, and those electronic pollys-no matter how well meaning they appeared- would have been faded electrons, gone forever. It's ALWAYS better to be safe than sorry when dealing with potental life threatening issues of which y2k was a major one, and just because the links didn't blink out at midnite doesn't mean preparations of an extreme nature weren't warranted. THEY WERE MOST DEFINETLY NEEDED, AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE NEEDED That's why the pollys get ignored, because of the stakes and odds, and in this case, because the gov orgs and biz orgs are such liars all the time. One or 2 % truth telling doesn't cut it for me, nope, not a bit, sorry. And my personal life has been strengthened, not weakened by preparations, haven't suffered zip negative results, none, and those who did alledgedly "suffer" because of a recent conversion to preparations really don't understand the difference between true rational "survivalism" as it relates to real and varied life, and being a "y2k prepper". Y2k concerns were great in that aspect, though, at least for those 300,000 or so for whom y2k was their first real look at "Survivalism" beyond what they have been spoonfed by the news and hollywood. If you are a "survivalist" you aren't ever as effected by the lies as someone who has to continually judge "is this the truth, or are they lying again?" Because you can never tell, you have to assume they are always lying, even ignoring the 1% of the time they are not. "Survivalism" is a 100% POSITIVE GOOD THING. People who prepare, who decided it was time to take charge of their own future a little better, who decided to think for themselves outside the herd mentality are just better off. It's rough always making decisions, but tough kitty, life can be rough all the time, we always have to make decisions. The ridiculers and pollys and the "I told you so" children can byte me. They have always failed to see the "big picture". I carry jumper cables, but hardly ever use them, I guess pollys would ridicule me on that, too. Go ahead and take it to an extreme, a family has sold their completely ridiculous town house, dependent on everything "working" all the time, and now they have moved rural, their children are homeschooled, they get at least half their food from a garden, they have back up heat and water and power that they don't have to keep paying monthly bills for, and they have developed a closeness of family and friends that has worked out for the better. IT'S GOOD! They have a new political awarenes, no longer lead by the nose by the teevee. THAT'S GOOD. They have arranged for their retirement in such a way as not being so heavily dependent on a weird economy, or inflation, etc. THAT'S GOOD. Maybe their current jobs don't make them as much "money", but maybe now their bills are much less, they don't have stress, hours weekly commuting in traffic jams, and worrying about when the crack neighborhoods will reach their block. THAT'S GOOD. IT'S ALL GOOD.

-- zog (zzoggy@yahoo.com), February 02, 2000.

I also like the phrase "It wasn't just the public that was drawn into the hysteria".

Sure enough, drawn into the 'hysteria' were FEMA, the FBI, the CIA, the DoD, the US Senate, the US House of Representatives, the United Nations, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), all of the world's Central Banks led by the sacrosanct US Federal Reserve Board, all of the world's governments, led by the pure allmighty White House, all of the world's banking and insurance industry, corporate America, and a whole bunch of other two-bit suckers who fell for the y2k 'hoax' because of sheer ignorance and gullibility.

In a way, funny article.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.

Cherri,

Thank you for posting this article.

Some good points to this, such as "What have we learned" and the background info, but the text reads like a CYA PSYOP to me. (Not that there's anything wrong with that)...(Seinfeld episode).

-- Dee (T1Colt556@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

Let me please attempt to summarize Y2K up to February 1, 2000:

(A) In PRACTICE, we are doing reasonably O.Kay

(B) In THEORY, we are doing terrible, as no-one has yet reasonably explained why everything has turned out so 'right'.

The fat lady has yet to sing

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.

Thanks, Cherri. I've been waiting for this.

I'm only partially through the article, but already I see something that's been rattling around in my cranium for months:

"The first casualty of Y2K wasnt technical, it was the communication links between the enterprise, its suppliers, and their customers. Lawyers demanded "No Comment" be the response to any questions. That famine of information quickly turned to a feeding frenzy.

During 1999 every major corporation was slowly sinking under the sheer weight of compliance demands.Intelligence, even common sense was replaced by Lawyers."

Yep. I'm calling this: "Squirrels as Terrorists and other Conspiracies."

Thanks again.

:)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

Of course, what I still can't figure out is why the CSIS Y2k Website is deader than a doornail, yet still online. Huh?

:)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

George, to answer the implied question in part B, because nothing is perfect. We don't need perfect for things to be OK. Afterall, look at your own life. It's not perfect, yet somehow you have survived.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), February 02, 2000.

I don't agree with you Marma, because sometimes things, if not perfect, need to work out reasonably well.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.

My dear Mistress Cherri,

You may wipe your fevered brow dear lady. Your post was substancial (wordy any way). But I do wish you would holster your smoking pistol and use your self admitted expertise.

We have had two terrible air craft crashes, while the one off African gives a preliminary reading of engine failure (possibly due to fuel troubles). The L.A. crash with it's rear stabializer (reportedly) problems. Could well be explained by your self.(Seeing as your expertise is supposedly in air craft controls).

The embedded systems are having problems dear lady...And there can be no denying them occuring! I have installed the little beggers, and have friends going all out to keep the pipe lines and refineries from blowing their respective stacks..For those who have been curious, though I do not know the lady personally. DD1 is for real. I know of her work, and know some of the customers she has contracted (possibly the wrong descripton, where the lady is concerned). With.... I would suggest that a bit more livity be used when consdering what the lady (DD1) has said or would be willing to say in the future. She might well help you save life and limb..

Now try holding just a smiggin to the left when you fire Mistress Cherri. The turkeys are getting tired of ducking.

"As for me...I shall finish the Game"!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Shakey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), February 02, 2000.

I saw this paper being presented yesterday and spoke with Mr. Simpson afterwards for several minutes about it. I told him that I liked the first five minutes of the talk (in which he described the information void). The middle of the talk however is nonsense, and a step in the wrong direction in trying to write the history of Y2K and create lessons learned. However, I agree with previous posters that the lessons learned denoted at the end are quite sound.

Many of the most pessimistic Y2K commenters came from the religious right (or fundementalists community, or evengelical -- I don't want to mischaraterise these people) or the survivalist/militia movement fringe. However, this does not describe the entire spectrum of voices that were sounding alarm bells. Nor is there any reason to assume, as Mr. Simpson does, that specific false alarms were being propagated in an organized, conspiratorial manner to the end of selling survival goods or gaining religious converts, or whatever. In fact, one particular false alarm I forgot to mention to Mr. Simpson yesterday was the "fact" that railroad switches on at least one line had all been replaced over a period of ten years with devices that could not be controlled manually. I had heard this story from Mr. Simpson during the course of his presentation at the same venue, CSIS, in June of 1998. That particular forum was broadcast over C-Span and became one of their most ordered video tapes. This one story had longer legs than some of the tales Mr. Simpson relates that I, frankly, never heard before yesterday (e.g. the computer chip on the bottom of the nuclear reactor pile).

Other people sounding the alarm included prominent names in the IT field, including of course Ed Yourdon, Howard Rubin and Capers Jones. I was never aware of anyone of comparable credentials publicly expressing the view that there would be virtually no problems associated with Y2K. Organizations of IT professionals, including the IEEE (Dale Way) and the Society for Information Management (Leon Kappelman) had Y2K task forces headed by knowledgeable, objective and responsible people who were busy sounding the public alarm about the seriousness of Y2K, (and at least through the Summer of 1998) and of the lackluster response in a large number of commercial or government entities. I am not familiar with any professional organizations or academicians of comparable stature who were publicly stating a conflicting message.

The limited amount of information about the status of remediation efforts made Y2K analysis akin to the old Kremlinologists, looking at shadows in photographs to discern if there is greater meaning to what is being seen. (This is consistent with Mr. Simpson's thesis of the information void). The information available to the public consisted of: 1) Independent surveys (Howard Rubin's work for Cap Gemini or the Texas A & M survey of small chemical manufacturers are two examples) that cast great doubt about the readiness of the overall survey universe.

2) Published reports of trade associations that inevitably had Executive Summaries that were far more optimistic than the report contents (The Senate Committee's 100 Day Report also met that description). It was never clear if the reports represented well co-ordinated efforts within given industries or the orchestration of information via the trade associations.

3) Bland statements like "We are confident that we will be ready for business in the Year 2000" that never had the hard, underlying data that might help an outsider assess the validity of the statement. (This is also consistent with Mr. Simpson's info-void thesis).

4) SEC disclosures which never really disclosed much, but which described "reasonable" worst-case scenarios that belied the bland statements in number 3.

While there may have been a few opportunists trying to exploit the concerns that the few people who took the trouble to survey the landscape were feeling, I don't think that they are much different from someone selling expensive home security systems (or "The Club" anti-auto theft devices on TV) that essentially profit by helping to alleive a worry of the purchaser. Nor do I think that anyone can make a convincing case that corporate America spent such large sums of money to address the problem because decision makers were suckered by fringe groups spreading fear over the internet.

Y2K was a real problem that was massive and complex. As of now, it appears that it was largely managed successfully (I know that the fat lady hasn't sung yet, but she is warming up). There are interesting lessons to learn and a fascinating story to discover about how the information about adequate practises was transmitted across the world and throughout the economy. Mr. Simpson made a good start with the lessons learned part. He does a terrible job describing the information transmission part.

-- Jay Golter (JGolter@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

well, I just got a call from a trucker friend on the road in Ohio who paid $2.23 a gallon for diesel, when last week it was just over $1.00. So despite the verbose and never-ending self-congratulatory rants by pollys, the fat lady hasn't sung yet.

-- elskon (elskon@bigfoot.com), February 02, 2000.

Maria, that's pretty close to right on, even if it might sound incredibly simplistic. The current consensus is that something around 85% of the world's systems have been Y2K remediated. That number sounds scary (you mean 15% of the systems haven't!?! It means TEOTWAWKI!!!)

What you need to do if this worries you is realize that there is a weighting of importance involved here - assign a weight to the importance of each system and to the importance of the actual date functionailty within each of those systems (ie, will it "break" the system or just show an incorrect date on an unimportant internal or external timestamp, etc.) and you'll find that the 15% unremediated systems add up to probably much less than 1% of the important weight adjusted computational capacity of the world. This also explains very elegantly what happened in countries where remediation work was light or behind - the lack of computers and embedded systems in those countries made remediation much less important there. Pretty simple, and the observations and facts we can take so far bear this out almost to the letter. There were many people who were coming to this conclusion and sounding this out last year, BTW, but I doubt they would have been listened to on this forum anyway.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 02, 2000.

Cherri, thanks for posting this. Of all of the Post-Y2K analysis, this is one that I felt compelled to respond to. One of the points made clear in this address was the lack of information coming from the government and industry on what was going on and what they were doing about it. If there is a lessons-learned here, it is that the public demands straight answers and the PRs groups had better give it to them. Otherwise, endless speculation will spin out of control. I had begun to question the lack of credible information coming from our official sources right after the rollover. While many were angry at the Ed Yourdons of the world, I questioned why we could not get straight answers in the first place.

I suspect that some of this misinformation was in fact disinformation. While I do not totally agree with Simpsons thoughts on the Gary Norths of the world using Y2K for profiteering (I think that on the whole the intentions of some of those individuals were good, but not all of them), I do agree that we, the public, can be generally cynical and suspicious if we think that we are not being told the truth, or any parts thereof. Parallel to the Y2K story, I had been tracking information from NOAA and the BCC on the increase of solar flare activity that they said could have the same effects on satellites and power systems as Y2K. In fact, these sources were saying that the solar max could be the real Y2K. Interesting that no one seemed to pick up on that story. I began to think that perhaps Y2K was a cover for celestrial events that we have no real control over. But heck, who knows?

The internet certainly changes how information is disseminated  it is not yet as controlled as other forms of media. However, the surfer should always beware. The very fact that some information posted on the Net is difficult to confirm and often goes unsubstantiated should give pause to all of us seeking answers. I do think that forums such as TB2000 is excellent for weighing opinions as well as provoking independent thought.

-- Mello1 (Mello1@ix.netcom.com), February 02, 2000.

Millions swallowed this, [the Navy survey uncovered by Jim Lord] and believed this hoax, and of course ran out to buy the books and survival kits!!

Millions ran out to buy books and survival kits because of Jim Lord? Alan Simpson seems to be engaging in the same kind of hyperbole he's accusing others of.

I prepared simply because I was not sure how how Y2k would turn out, and I don't think the government did either. It spent $50 million in late 1999 to build an information center to track Y2k problems.

-- Justin Case (Preparation@was.prudent), February 02, 2000.

Speaking from the doomer trenches, I'll admit to being affected by Lord's Y2k "Penatagon Papers" hype; but that sort of disclosure was in itself inconclusive. There were documents too numerous to digest, published on offical webistes, and memos from Wm. Cohen circulating that left one unavoidably with the conclusion that it was more than reasonable to expect serious shit.

I found the Department of Defense Base Commanders' Y2K Handbook -- 150-200 pp. -- was weighty evidence: the extensive checklists in it for confirming backups to every essential resource and facility at every defense base, and for reporting complaince status to DOD. There was the Naval War College website, which was filled with speculative material, but hardly any of it reassuring. There were "updates" of the Base Readiness spreadsheets, that had "hidden columns of 3's" that could be unhidden with Excel. Dale Way's essay, and dozens of other authoritative items substantiated the more lurid, imaginative reports from North.

Heck ... NSA computers crash for 4 days; spy satellite transmissions lost; refineries down worldwide ....... I was not wrong to prep. Not YET anyway.

>"<

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), February 02, 2000.

I was about to mention the Naval War College colloquia. Just look at the lists of participants. These guys were not lawyers plotting barratry. They were influential people taking the possibilities seriously.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 02, 2000.

Cherri, thanks for the post. Jay, that was an excellent summary. I agree but would accuse Mr. Simpson of less than honest hyperbole as well as historical revisionism in almost two thirds of his presentation. I am suspicious of someone who owns a website that "has been viewed by over 4 million people from 140 countries". He made some very valid points, but I have lingering doubts about the primary motivation of this presentation. Two thirds of his speach struck me more as a face saving exercise than a critical postmortem of Y2k to date. Finally, where the hell did "embedded systems buried deep in the nuclear pile which contained dates" come from? Sounds like he had to reach all the way up to the elbow to pull that one out.

-- PA Engineer (PA Engineer@longtimelurker.com), February 02, 2000.

You know what I like about this thread?

Good dialogue. Kind of reminds me of the old days.

Oh, by the way, "The Toilet Paper Chronicles Forum" is now secure, Chapter One is back online and Chapter Two shall be online shortly.

Come visit if you can. (Password protection required to keep nasty comments to a minimum. You may still post anonymously however)

Start Page for "The Toilet Paper Chronicles: Gallows Humor from the Y2k Underground

Oh, and Cherri, just a P.S.: I finished the Simpson speech, and while I have many observations, this will have to suffice for now:

Like many people, I did not have enough IT credentials to allow me to accurately judge who would best predict the outcome of this thing.

I primarily relied on what I learned from my government, particularly people elected to leadership positions. Why?

Just one reason among several: No matter what they told us, I KNEW many of them would--in theory--be held accountable on election day.

Cheers!

:)

-- FM (vidprof@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

Bemused, I'm bemused by your explanation because

(1) 75% of code is outside the US

(2) Knowledgeable sources (FBI, CIA, the US Senate, Gartner Group, etc.) clearly and loudly informed that many, many countries were far, far behind (Russia, China, Brazil, Italy, Turkey, Paraguay, Ecuador, etc.) still with no 'visible' effects, despite the fact that these countries have massive IT applications out there, pension payments, insurance and banking transactions, etc., just like any other y2k- ready country, except that they ain't ready.

(3) Still the fat lady hasn't sung, end-of-month transactions haven't been completed, and therefore all of these premature "explanations" are worthless.

(4) We do not yet know the etiology nor the epidemiology of y2k. Till then, anything and everything is up for grabs.

Still, your post is well taken.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.

P.S.: Bemused, Marma's "input" is an oxymoron. She only has output, pestilent, non-constructive 'output'

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.

George, you KNOW this is not true. This thread shows that you are wrong. Cherri deserves an appology.

-- Ignac Le Soit, Pilot (warhammer@Pride.of Mandeyne), February 03, 2000.

Lets see.

When our Government, and John Koskinens organization contracted with Perception Management organizations like the Rendon Group, some of us thought, with valid reason, that the dot govs, et. al., might be trying to hide something. With research, we most certainly discovered they ALL were. (Read the TBY2K archives... and sift through the chaff for the wheat).

Gosh? Think the public and private sectors might still be withholding accurate information, as a strategic info choice?

Humm. Do believe the Congressional 90-day signed into lawsuit moratorium ends at the tailend of March. You figure it out. The InfoVoid is STILL alive and well.

Meanwhile, prudence dictates observing potential events for awhile longer, for those who choose to. Or not... for those who dont. (Guess Cherri, Maria and others choose to).

*Grin*

Still grateful for the hot showers, and as I recall, many people, or even fat ladies, still sing in them.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,150010800,00.html?

Link

Deseret News, Wednesday, February 02, 2000, 12:00 AM MST

Bennett reflects on thankless job: Y2K alarmist

But Utah senator receives praise at follow-up meeting

By Lee Davidson

Deseret News Washington correspondent

WASHINGTON  Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, says the press and world never were  and still aren't  exactly grateful for his lead role in rallying global forces to squash the Y2K computer bug.

"It was a fascinating experience to go through, starting at the point where nobody would listen to you," he told a group of experts conducting a post-mortem exam of how Y2K was handled.

Once he persuaded the press and business world to listen and believe that the problem was real, he said too many later did not believe modified predictions that things would not be too bad.

"People would attack you for not being apocalyptic enough," he said. "And then when the thing finally worked, they attacked you for raising it in the first place" because so few problems occurred that they doubted any threat ever existed.

In fact, Arnaud de Borchgrave, host of the post-mortem exam at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said Bennett and other Y2K experts are now often portrayed as "twittering morons who deserve to be lashed with a cat o' nine tails."

But de Borchgrave added, "Those who know the issue inside and out shudder to think how disastrous the rollover could have been had these costly measures not been taken."

Bennett was even praised by Deputy Defense Secretary John J. Hamre, who credited him with preventing possibly disastrous shutdowns in defense computer systems  which he said would have shut down many high-tech weapons and communications.

"I'd like to thank Sen. Bennett for giving us a kick in the butt when we needed it. Without it, I don't think we would have gotten our act together," Hamre said.

Bennett told the group that the Y2K threat had indeed been real.

"It didn't get totally solved. I've got a list here of glitches that occurred all the way from the stock market in Pakistan (where computers crashed) to the slot machines in Delaware (that would not work)," he said.

"We always knew that (sort of thing) would happen. But the big fear was that failures would cascade," he said. "If we could stop the connections (allowing failures to cascade), we could handle the random occurrences. That's what happened."

He added that a major reason that Y2K problems were not as bad as original predictions is that embedded computer chips in machines were not as big a problem as feared.

Originally, 2 percent to 3 percent were expected to fail and stop machinery they controlled. Later, it was found that their time functions failing would not shut down most machines  making the overall problem much smaller.

Bennett and Hamre said how Y2K was handled could be a model for handling other major problems.

For example, they noted that it was handled without partisan rancor, and business worked closely with government. Bennett said that may have happened only because it "was a crisis with a deadline."

Also, they said a special committee headed by Bennett was formed to look at how the problem cut "horizontally" across "vertical" areas of jurisdiction by traditional committees overseeing everything from agriculture to banking and small business.

Bennett said many other problems  from terrorism to technology  should be reviewed in similar "horizontal" fashion cutting across traditional committee boundaries, but "hell hath no fury like a committee chairman whose jurisdiction is violated."

Still, he said he has recommended to Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott that more such task forces be formed to better handle such cross- jurisdictional problems.

Copyright ) 2000, Deseret News Publishing Corp.

-- (in@the.news), February 03, 2000.

Ignac, Cherri does not need any "appology" of mine.

You wouldn't be a troll, would ya?

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 03, 2000.

George, when did you start kicking dogs? You seriously need some help, get it.

-- Maria (anon@mous.com), February 03, 2000.

You don't belong in this forum Marma. Your input is disgraceful. If you stick around it's because YOU need some help. Just stick your ugly face elsewhere and leave us yourdonites alone.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 03, 2000.